On 2006-11-15, Oleg Verych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2006-11-15, hendrik wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 01:00:37AM +0000, Tyler wrote: >>> I don't know that it's enough reason to go on living, but you will find >>> those docs (in)conveniently stored in the package >>> emacs21-common-non-dfsg, in the non-free repos. > > Sure i can. Anyone can. But this is not all DFSG thing about. > >>> At some point I wonder if the devs will realize that they undermine >>> their efforts to encourage users to use a dfsg-free system by all but >>> forcing us into the non-free repos for basic documentation? >> >> Which devs are the ones responsible here: the Debian devs who put it >> there, or the upstream ones that presumably put non-free constraints on >> the documentatin license? Or is it all a big misunderstanding? > > DFSG is Stallman's "write down your modified version of recipe", unlike > GFDL. I think users, like me (us?), must contact FSF and RMS there. It > seems, we left our developers along against them.
And days after i wrote that, want to visit gnu.org to see they info and contact to do some fsck on them and it seems to be down, very deeply down. ;-E -- -o--=O`C info emacs : not found /. .\ ( is there any reason to live? ) #oo'L O info make : not found o (R.I.P. Debian Operating System) <___=E M man gcc : not found .-- ( TNX, RMS. ) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
